w/robe Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 As everyone has said, get out of this situation now! You do not want to have any part in this production. If you have discussed with anyone how this effect can be achieved (actor, director, fellow technician) write to them stating that after due consideration and taking advice, you think that everything you said was wrong and that this effect should not be attempted under any circumstances. You don't even what them to use your ideas. Flying people is easy, its the putting them back together the 1 time it goes wrong that is difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pro-1-day Posted June 7, 2005 Author Share Posted June 7, 2005 Thanks everyone I'm now off the show but no-one can understand my reason. They say that they have done a risk assesment and dont see a problem. Thier reasoning goes like this: The cast member will be suspended using ankle supports that are designed for doing "sit-ups" from a chin-up bar. The cast member in question has been using them for sometime and never fallen off. Given that these supports have been used over 100 times without fail the risk of them failing is very minimal. The fly-bar will have a load on it when the performer is not on-board so there will be no problem there. Therefore they have decided that the only increase in risk is when the bar is moving (only going 6ft up waiting til the end of the scene then 6ft down). The supports are being used for the purpose they were intended for except that the user will be 6ft higher than normal. Having listened to that I'm starting to think that maybe I'm over-reacting. Either way the show is still going on, the venue knows about it, and friends of mine are now doing the job instead of me. Your comments please.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 From British Standard 7906-1:2005, Use of Lifting Equipment for Performance, Broadcast and similar application... 9 Flying of Performers 9.1 General All performer flying sequences should be carefully planned to include risk assessments, selection of appropriate equipment, establishment of availability of competent operators and provision for adequate preparation of flown performers. Performer flying should be supervised by a competent person who is the point of contact for the performer(s) throughout the flying procedure. So that's two uses of the word competent in two adjacent sentences. Sorry to say this but the fact you had to ask on an internet forum how to do something clearly proves that you aren't competent to do it. Oh, and any insurance the group/venue has will be null and void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Langfeld Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 This has to be a wind-up, surely. Tell your friends and the director that their blatant disregard for the cast (which is above the top of the priorities list!!!) is pathetic and immoral. Then proceed to contact the HSE and have them send someone along to a rehearsal of this outrageous stunt. You'll soon find your director with a very solemn look on his/her face. Edit: You also say "only 6ft up". Sorry to shock you, but 6ft is quite a way to fall when your upside down! You hit the deck and there's almost no chance of survival. The performer's neck would undoubtedly be broken. "Only 6 ft" is a silly oversight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 The supports are being used for the purpose they were intendedNo, they're not. If they're the kind of thing I'm thinking of, their intended purpose is to suspend a person as a 'static load', i.e. not moving. By attaching someone to these ankle straps and then raising them 6ft into the air, the load suddenly becomes dynamic - therefore, these ankle straps are now being used outside of their original design parameters. If they fail under such circumstances, the manufacturers simply won't want to know as you would be using them in a way which they almost certainly don't recommend. Also, I'd imagine that these products are designed and marketed for domestic use only. By taking them into a working environment like a theatre, a whole raft of different criteria suddenly come into play. And no, you're not over-reacting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallPaul Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 The cast member will be suspended using ankle supports that are designed for doing "sit-ups" from a chin-up bar. The cast member in question has been using them for sometime and never fallen off. Given that these supports have been used over 100 times without fail the risk of them failing is very minimal. The fly-bar will have a load on it when the performer is not on-board so there will be no problem there. Therefore they have decided that the only increase in risk is when the bar is moving (only going 6ft up waiting til the end of the scene then 6ft down). The supports are being used for the purpose they were intended for except that the user will be 6ft higher than normal.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I am certainly not an expert in this, but from what you have said above the company's risk assessment does not seem to have looked at the medical problems associated with suspending someone upside down. It seems to be mostly looking at the risk of falling from height. This indicates that the person performing the risk assessment has not understood the specific risks themselves, which isn't a great sign. Agree with everyone's comments above. The show certainly does not "have to go on". Bodging together a potentially dangerous effect is asking for trouble, and is not only personally damaging to the individuals involved in any accident, but sheds a bad light on an industry which thankfully has a good track record in this field. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GridGirl Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 And just to bring up something additional - I'm pretty sure that if you're flying a person it has to be on a double-brake system - which a counterweight system is very unlikely to have unless you're in a single-purchase house with a brake rail at both floor and gallery level (which, incidentally, I have only come across once). Also, how are they planning to move the performer across the stage - on a tab track? Not designed for the purpose and certainly not safe. This is a minefield of H&S, someone needs to make the director see sense. I have a feeling that the venue and company insurance would have a lot to say about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzler Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 Just out of curiosity...... what venue is this happening at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the kid Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 I don't know what others think but if its going to be so dangerous that someone could be injured/killed, could pro-1-day not contact the authorities about it, and inform of the situation etc etc ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djw1981 Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 If I were the OP then I would contact the HSE and the local council. Both of whom have a strong interest and enforcement line on stunts far less dangerous than this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 I don't know what others think but if its going to be so dangerous that someone could be injured/killed, could pro-1-day not contact the authorities about it, and inform of the situation etc etc ?<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Have you actually read any of the other 23 posts that precede yours in this topic before steaming in with your two penn'orth? :D If you had, you'd know perfectly well "what others think" ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the kid Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 I was referring to the matter of repotting the show to not to the the HSE and the local council, not to the actual problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zonino Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 thats what people have been saying...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Pearce Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 Someone should report this so we don't get a post back saying: The stunt went wrong, the actor is now paralysed from the neck down for life.The cast, crew, director and producer have been called into a court case.Theatre has been closed and local licensing authority now inspect every show before curtain up. Anyone agree with me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djw1981 Posted June 7, 2005 Share Posted June 7, 2005 And this thread could be used to get the OP into trouble as well for not reporting what he has been told is a dangerous stunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.